Regarding The Claim That The Lore Of Vampire Brides Is Supposedly Outdated Because It’s Based On Van

Fans of Ascended Astarion have consistently faced accusations of romanticizing abuse since the fandom’s inception. After Patch 7, these accusations have only intensified, now directed not only at players but also at the developers themselves, Larian Studios.

And I have something to say about this.

Astarion has become a sort of mirror for players, reflecting their own experiences, personal preferences, and so on. The romanticization of this character is common among almost all of his fans, regardless of which route they have chosen as their favorite. Attachment to this character inevitably involves a degree of idealization and bias in the perception of his actions. Even when Astarion engages in questionable or cruel behavior, fans often tend to find justifications for him.

From the very first moments of the game, Astarion reveals himself as a personality prone to deviant behavior: he manipulates those around him, shows a tendency towards violence, and exhibits a disregard for morality. Yet, despite this, players often interpret his actions from a standpoint of sympathy, seeing them as a result not so much of his character, but rather of his tragic past. As a victim of violence and cruel torment at the hands of Cazador, Astarion evokes a desire to justify his actions, labeling him as a victim of circumstance.

Thus, Astarion's past serves as a powerful justification for many players regarding his dark deeds: instead of viewing him as a cruel manipulator, they see a wounded soul struggling to survive in a world that has always been unfair to him. This desire to find justification and "save" the character "from himself" is intensified by the romantic context of his interactions with the player. Such a perspective often results in the dangerous traits of Astarion losing their edge, creating a more palatable image that fits into the romantic fantasy of redemption.

This undoubtedly contradicts the author's intent, who, when asked what traits are most important for Astarion to "be him," emphasized that Astarion remains a horrible character throughout the game and in many respects. According to the writer, he is prone to violence, revels in blood, and embodies the darker sides of human nature. Astarion is someone who can kill with a smile on his face. Nevertheless, his character is also designed for the player to feel sympathy for him: despite his wicked nature, he must remain appealing and cheerful so that the player wants to have him in their party. The writer likely did not believe that the status of a victim and survivor should serve as an indulgence for the character.

But only fans of Ascended Astarion face accusations of romanticizing him, and I just want to draw your attention to the double standards behind such accusations.

The idea of "fixing" Astarion is a form of romanticization, and this trope, in essence, is indeed a romanticization.

The trope "I can fix him" is one of the popular plot devices in literature, film, and games, especially in romantic storylines where one partner encounters a dark character. In the realm of gaming and artistic fiction, such a trope is not only acceptable but also appealing, as it allows players to experience an emotionally rich yet safe fantasy.

However, in real life, the trope "I can fix him" can be dangerous, as it creates the illusion that love can change a person and resolve psychological or behavioral issues that actually require professional help.

This trope can distort the perception of relationships, creating the illusion that toxic behavior, violence, or manipulation from a partner can be changed by the power of love, attachment, or willingness to sacrifice oneself.

"You were by my side through all of this. Through bloodlust and pain and misery. You were patient. You cared. You trusted me when that was an objectively stupid thing to do."

Here, one might ask: why is the romanticization of the spawn route considered more acceptable? Analyzing both routes, they both imply the romanticization of a potentially dangerous person to some extent. It’s possible that fans of Ascended Astarion attract more attention due to the obvious symbolism of power and its imbalance, but that doesn’t mean the spawn route is less romanticized in its essence. Both endings represent different facets of the same character, and attachment to one version is not necessarily more "justified" than to the other. Some romanticize him as vulnerable and seeking redemption, while others see his dark potential and ambition for power. In both cases, the perception of the character remains subjective, and it is unfair to assert that one form of romanticization is more acceptable than the other. In my opinion, again subjective, ignoring his dark sides in favor of the idea of "redemption" can create a distorted image of the character, where his darker tendencies are downplayed and undervalued for the sake of his potential "salvation."

But it's always only the fans of Ascended Astarion who often face concerns about their mental health and claims that such fantasies supposedly push women to choose abusive partners in real life. But by that logic, the spawn route ending is also a dangerous fantasy when applied to reality.

Thus, by following the "good" path, we willingly bind ourselves to a potentially dangerous partner who can kill us several times throughout the game, yet we continue to believe that we can fix or heal him with love, friendship, and support, and that he will ultimately reveal a different, better side of himself. This is literally the mentality of abuse victims: they see the deeply hidden "kindness" behind the aggressive facade and believe they can awaken it and change the person for the better. It is this faith in the "healing" of the abuser that prevents them from leaving.

But it is obvious that there is a profound divide between the world of fantasy and reality, and what works within the framework of a fictional story should not be applied to everyday life. Fantasies in games, books, or movies allow us to safely experience complex and idealized situations, immersing ourselves in roles and scenarios that can be destructive or dangerous in real life. For no fan of Ascended Astarion does this story serve as a basis for real beliefs or behavioral models in real life.

But I have seen some fans of the spawn route sincerely claim that Astarion evokes a sense of safety for them due to his status as a victim of sexual violence, which resonates with many women's experiences and personal experiences of abuse. This statement raises questions, especially when it comes to a character who can kill you when you try to help him. And if you do not want to help him, he may manipulate you into doing so.

The entire romance with Astarion is a romanticization of a walking red flag.

A romance with Astarion offers several ways to experience fantasy, and it would be hypocritical to judge it from a real-world perspective solely in the evil route. Like the "I can fix him" trope, the storyline with Ascended Astarion allows the player to explore certain psychological and emotional aspects.

Ultimately, characters like Astarion are designed to be ambiguous. All fans of Astarion, in one way or another, are involved in the process of romanticization, as they choose the path that resonates most closely with their personal preferences.

Fantasies about salvation through love are a normal occurrence in artistic works and fantasy settings, but is it fair to demand that fans of Ascended Astarion "take off their rose-colored glasses"? I am convinced that fans of Ascended Astarion have a much more sober view of the character, at least recognizing the dark side of Astarion and accepting it as a fundamental part of his character rather than as a mere byproduct of trauma.

The argument that "the romanticization of abuse in games encourages people to choose abusive relationships in real life" sounds as absurd as the claim that "shooters provoke people to commit real murders." Following this logic, one could accuse any stories that address complex or dark themes of allegedly romanticizing or promoting dangerous or socially unacceptable phenomena. For example, an intimate scene with Halsin in bear form could be perceived as romanticizing zoophilia since it is portrayed in a positive light if one ignores the entire context and forgets that it is fiction. However, it is clear that this scene is created for humor.

I truly believe that many of those who accuse fans of Ascended Astarion of romanticization hardly realize how deeply they themselves are immersed in it. There is nothing fair in these accusations, especially considering the source from which they come.

Neil on Ascended Astarion's Laugh

Neil: I didn't ever really improvise anything. I'd improvise how I'd say the line obviously, but I didn't improvise any words really for Astarion. There's hardly anything that I've changed, maybe like one thing, just because it didn't quite work. So largely all the script is as scripted. I did the lines as scripted.

But there was definitely a moment I think I tried to squeeze in muahahas and things like that. *laughs* Like what if I can get away with a cackling laugh that kind of sounds like a muahaha?

Oh, he has a new laugh, I didn't tell you that. Ascended Astarion has a new laugh. Do you want to hear it?

Blue Owl Medic: I feel like it's more true to the character.

Neil: But do you want to hear the actual Ascended Astarion's laugh? I don't know if you picked up on it on your playthrough.

BOM: Yes. No, I haven't actually gotten there.

Neil: I changed the laugh. So, the laugh with Unascended is *high-pitched giggling laugh*. It's all like high and lilting and trill and shrill sort of up and piercing. And then Lord Astarion is *laughs haughtily* Like that. So I dropped it. So he goes, "Oh dear. Well that's not very good, is it. *laughs*" It's all like down here. *points at throat* And low and short as well. So it was really like--it was fun. You'll see it. So there's a difference.

BOM: It's like a wealthy laugh.

Neil: It's a wealthy laugh. It's an of-means laugh.

BOM: Aristocratic, I see somebody say.

Neil: It's a better-than-you laugh. 'I have more money than you. *laughs*'

BOM: 'I have a palace. What do you have? A camp? Fuck you.'

Neil: 'I have a castle. *laughs* Don't you have one? Sorry, that's sad for you.' Yeah, like that.

--from Neil's February 1, 2024 twitch stream

Hello, Welch's spawn. I think when it comes to ascension, people tend to make up too much.

«He hides his hurt and insecurities behind that mask of the villain, behind his facade of power and dominance. Under it all he’s still the frightened spawn cowering in the kennels.»

Neil Newbon: We're just using completely different status shift changes as well. So whereas he has a lot of flow and all that kind of stuff and it's theatrical and distracting — it's always 'look over here and don't see how I really feel' with spawn Astarion.

With Lord Astarion, we talked a lot about the idea that the cover is now off completely. So that you see him at his most terrible, and it's completely honest and he doesn't have to pretend anymore. So he loses a lot of the flamboyance and the fun of the theatricality, which is all a distraction anyway. That's all distraction so you don't see how he's hurt and damaged and his vulnerability. Lord Astarion doesn't need that anymore. So we just thought, okay, now mimics taking off a mask it's off. He doesn't need to pretend, he doesn't need to do too much.

It’s no secret Astarion hates himself. Like he deals with a lot of insecurities and self loathing. He just puts on an act of self confidence and narcissism to properly play the role of sexy vampire.

But I think a lot of people miss when he Ascends this gets so much worse. Not only does he still think he’s only good for sex and has nothing to offer beyond that. Now he’s a monster, not by force but by choice. He choose to become a monster. Now he’s expanded his act from sexy vampire to evil sexy vampire. He’s playing the villain because that’s what he thinks he is. And as we know he’s really not that great at acting.

I think it’s interesting everyone always talks about seeing through Astarion’s facade but when it comes to him ascending they’re so quick to fall for his act all over again.

There’s the line “if you stay with him he will always see you as degrading yourself” in his post ascension romance scene. A lot of people interpret it at face value as he hates and looks down on Tav. But I think it’s miss understood because he could never hate Tav as much as he hates himself. Infact I’d say he has Tav put up on the highest pedestal. He sees them as the kindest most caring person in the whole world. He adores them and holds them in the highest regard. That’s why them wanting to be with him so much they would even put themselves beneath him is the ultimate degradation. It’s also why he feels he has to turn them because he doesn’t believe there’s any reason they’d choose to stay with him of their own free will while at the same time he can’t bare to loose them. He can’t wrap his head around the idea that you could actually love a monster like him.

If you say you want freedom in the reunion party he panics. Why would you want freedom? To leave him? You want to leave him? Why? When he’s given you the only things he’s good for; luxury and sex. That’s the only reason you choose him in the first place. He’s desperate to make Tav happy. With out Tav he has nothing. He is nothing.

He hides his hurt and insecurities behind that mask of the villain, behind his facade of power and dominance. Under it all he’s still the frightened spawn cowering in the kennels. And there’s no one he’s more desperate to hide this from than Tav lest they realize their mistake of caring for him and leave.

I have always perceived the act of kneeling in the scene where Tav undergoes the transformation into a spawn not merely as an act of submission, but as a kind of oath-taking ceremony. In D&D lore, vampires possess a lawful evil alignment, which is inseparable from strict principles of hierarchy. Astarion calls Tav his consort, emphasizing not only his power and status but also Tav's crucial role in his plans. This also symbolizes their union within the framework of vampiric hierarchy and the new life that will begin after Tav's transformation.

Consort is a title traditionally used to refer to the spouse of a monarch. In the context of a royal family, a consort does not hold the rights of a ruler but serves as an important figure in public and state affairs.

It is particularly noteworthy that it is right after the night of the turning that Astarion first calls Tav his consort, which I personally cannot see as mere coincidence unless he intentionally imbued the event with ritualistic meaning. Such wording is undoubtedly steeped in an aura of regal solemnity, which is especially remarkable for Astarion, given his yearning for grandeur and liberation from his former subordinate position.

When Tav knelt before Astarion, I was reminded of the painting «The Coronation of Napoleon» by the French artist Jacques-Louis David. The painting depicts the moment when Napoleon Bonaparte crowns his wife Josephine during the ceremony held in 1804 at Notre-Dame de Paris. Napoleon stands on an elevated platform in his imperial attire, including a luxurious cloak trimmed with ermine, as he places the crown on Josephine's head himself.

Meanwhile, in the developer's note to the animation tag for this scene in the game, it says: «Tav kneels before Astarion. Astarion stands proud before the Player. He is powerful. He is free.»

I have no doubt that Astarion was indeed imbuing this moment with a special ritualistic meaning. He wants Tav to acknowledge his supremacy by kneeling before him, as if it were an oath-taking ceremony. This is not just an act of dominance but a kind of ritual with profound cultural and historical undertones.

Undoubtedly, this scene is filled with clear eroticism, which perfectly aligns with Astarion's love for decadence and theatrics. I find this quite amusing, and I'm sure Astarion also enjoyed playing with this subtext, giving the moment a particular sexual tension and sharpness. All of this comes together in a quirky pattern, creating an exceptionally rich scene where cultural and erotic motifs intertwine.

Kneeling is a gesture that carries a variety of meanings depending on the cultural, historical, and social context. It is commonly associated with expressions of respect, submission, devotion, or acknowledgment. In a religious context, kneeling symbolizes reverence before a higher power, humility, or repentance. For example, in Christianity, people kneel before an altar or during prayer. In some religions, the gesture signifies a plea for help, mercy, or forgiveness. In a monarchical context, kneeling has been used as part of rituals such as knighting ceremonies or being admitted into the circle of royal privileges. In the feudal context of the Middle Ages, vassals knelt before their liege lord as a symbol of loyalty and submission. This act was often accompanied by kissing the hand or a symbol of authority (such as a sword or crown). In a romantic context, kneeling is a gesture symbolizing a marriage proposal, as well as an expression of respect, admiration, and love.

For myself, I highlight the following:

Acknowledgment of sovereignty — kneeling before a monarch symbolizes submission to the authority of the crown and recognition of its legitimacy.

Acceptance into the circle of royal privileges — in this context, the act can be interpreted as a ritual of initiation, where kneeling marks entry into an exclusive circle, granting access to the advantages and status associated with monarchy.

Astarion perceives himself and Tav as something superior to all other beings, stemming from the fact that Tav becomes a vampire. He believes that the transformation of Tav into a vampire grants them the opportunity to become "something more," elevating them to a new level. This transformation not only makes Tav a vampire but also symbolizes their entry into a special, elite category of beings who possess power and authority beyond the reach of ordinary mortals or other creatures. For Astarion, as a vampire, this means that Tav can now share in his greatness.

Astarion: You are stronger now. Better. You will thank me one day, I am sure. Astarion: You will be stronger, swifter, sharper, but you won't be different. You were already perfect before. It's hard to improve.

An expression of respect and devotion — such a gesture underscores reverence for the monarch as a divine or political symbol.

Kneeling as an act of humiliation:

In Astarion's thoughts, one can discern that he views Tav’s decision to stay with him and become his spawn as something indicative of degradation, perhaps even moral decline.

When Tav agrees to become Astarion’s spawn, it can be interpreted as a conscious act of self-sacrifice, where they relinquish equality in the relationship and willingly submit to him. This step symbolizes the rejection of personal autonomy and the acceptance of absolute dependence. Tav entrusts their life entirely into his hands. Astarion: You have given me everything. Thank you.

Astarion likely perceives such a decision as a form of "degradation," believing that a normal person, from his perspective, would not make such a choice. He tries to understand why Tav would do this and concludes that Tav derives a certain satisfaction from such a dynamic, perhaps even having an inclination toward it. Narrator: But perhaps you wish to degrade yourself. And he knows it.

This explains his surprise when Tav, contrary to his expectations, asks for tenderness. It’s simply not what he anticipates. His reaction reveals confusion and forces him to reassess Tav’s motives, as such a request goes beyond the scenario he had envisioned.

Astarion: So, tell me what you desire. What can I do for my dearest pet? Player: I want you. I want your body. Astarion: You've earned it. But don't you want more - don't you want eternity? One more bite is all it would take. As for Welch's remark that Astarion "won’t respect you," this narrative only applies to the phrase "I want your body," which itself is not required in the game. This line adds an interpretative layer but is not central to all the possible interactions between Tav and Ascended Astarion.

Baudelaire Welch: He's literally looking down on you because you are someone in that situation who believes you deserve sex as a reward. He will give it to you, but he won't respect you.

In essence, the entire narrative about the sexualization parallels the scene with Araj in Act 2, where the player asks for sex as a reward for defending Astarion before Araj or helping with Yurgir's murder. And although Welch desperately tried to impose this motif in the Ascended route, limiting roleplay, it is not the only one, and far from the most obvious. There are other reasons to help Astarion with the ritual, and even he is aware of them:

Astarion: Of course I understand love. All too well. The gravest crimes committed in this world are committed for love. A hunger crueller than bloodlust.

Many also overlook that Tav's consent to become his spawn is seen by Astarion as an expression of exceptional trust and devotion. His gratitude the following morning confirms this: he sincerely expresses appreciation for the trust shown in the very first phrase he addresses to Tav. Astarion: You are so beautiful... And you will be beautiful forever. Thank you for trusting me. Moreover, trust becomes the leitmotif of his dialogues afterwards, especially when their relationship with Tav is questioned or criticized by their companions. Each time, he emphasizes that their relationship is built on this foundation:

Karlach: You know, Astarion, I'm not sure I can trust you anymore. You're… different. A bit scary, to be honest. Astarion: I have one person who trusts me completely. That's enough for me. Lae'zel: You have shared your new power with your lover, Astarion. I'm surprised - I expected you to turn your back once you got what you wanted. Astarion: Quite the opposite - I need someone I can trust. And now I know they'll never betray me.

Unfortunately, in the kiss scenes of Patch 6, the original context was lost, and the focus shifted to themes of fear and humiliation that were not present in the original dynamic with Ascended Astarion. Considering that the kiss scenes were based on the scene of Tav’s transformation into a spawn, which is almost obvious, their emotional tone was distorted. For example, initially, Tav knelt entirely of their own free will, which emphasized the intentional and voluntary nature of their decision. In the kiss scenes, on the contrary, Tav is shown kneeling out of fear, the source of which remains unclear. Throughout the game, it is never shown what consequences Tav could fear for refusing to do so. In the transformation scene, Tav can refuse and not face any frightening consequences.

It also seems illogical when Tav is frightened when Astarion grabs them by the throat. This contradicts the transformation scene, where Tav themself initiated it, asking Astarion to hurt them and even tilting their head back, exposing their neck.

Astarion: It will only hurt a bit, the pleasure will be far greater than the pain. Player: Oh, come on. Let it hurt.

In the kiss scenes, however, this dynamic, based on mutual consent, was changed to an act of violence. This further exacerbates the inconsistency, especially considering that in the original script of this scene, it was noted that both Tav and Astarion derive pleasure from what is happening.

In dialogues, Ascended Astarion also demonstrated a willingness to be tender with Tav when Tav expressed it through words. He was not solely focused on rough dominance, as was attempted to be imposed in Patch 6. This change is likely an attempt by Larian to please the audience who, without going through the Ascended route and without understanding its nuances, actively promotes the narrative of the collective majority about the cycle of abuse.

Yes, the facial expressions in the kiss animations were changed due to fan requests for the Ascended route, but the aftertaste and consequences of these changes remain.

Some players still argue that facial expressions in role-playing games should be imposed "for the sake of the great narrative," while others use game conventions, such as cyclicality of animations, to demand the return of scared expressions. However, bringing back this dynamic would undermine the story and the character that fans of Ascended Astarion have known and loved for six months after the game's release.

In my opinion, to expand the role-playing experience, it would be much more useful not to return the scared expressions as an option, but to add the possibility for the lord to use more standard kisses, similar to those in Patch 5.

It is unclear why many are convinced that the vampire lord is incapable of tender kisses with Tav when his love scene demonstrated just this tenderness, and the moment with the kiss on the hand is one of the most refined and delicate romantic episodes. In particular, the kiss on the hand, which happens after the "be gentle" option is chosen, not only emphasizes Astarion's attention to Tav's desires and his willingness to listen, but also contradicts the notion of his exclusively dominant and cold nature.

If Astarion is capable of expressing such tenderness in intimacy, why is it excluded that the same softness could be maintained in his kisses?

The kiss in Patch 6 would only make sense if, upon choosing the "be gentle… if you can" option, Astarion ignored Tav's request, and his actions were no different from those in the "let it hurt" option.

I would also like to draw attention to the sharp contrast in Tav's facial expressions in the bite scenes, written by different writers. In Act 1, when Astarion was written only by Stephen Rooney, Tav's facial expression shows ecstasy, and this same expression is repeated in the lord's love scene, which, according to Welch, they did not write.

However, in the transformation scene, which, as Welch confirms, was written with their involvement, Tav's facial expression is noticeably different.

It’s not fear, like in the kisses from Patch 6, but the expression conveys a "problematic/kinky" mood — a term that Welch themselves used to describe this scene. This looks particularly strange in the dialogue where Tav explicitly asks to be hurt:

Astarion: Shall we have one last night together before you join me in immortality? One for the road, so to speak. Player: We shall not. I just need you to bite me. Astarion: Impatient are we? Well who am I to deny you?

This suggests that Welch’s views on "kinks" are at least debatable, and this influences how they are portrayed in the game. For example, Welch sees the transformation into a spawn as an "irreversible sex-pact/kink/form of gratification," but Tav's reaction in this scene is somewhat more uneasy than in previous episodes involving similar actions.

Both scenes are consensual, but they have a different tone simply because one of the writers condemned the player for "kinks," while the other did not.

In the cinematic context for the transformation scene, the following was stated: "You are naked and vulnerable before him." This feeling, it seems to me, is what the animators tried to convey and embody, capturing the intimacy of the moment. However, with the release of Patch 6, this message became distorted, turning into something entirely different — crude and devoid of the original subtle undertones.

In this context, I believe that the kisses from Patch 7 appear much more consistent compared to the facial expressions in Patch 6.

Especially when considering the following points:

Astarion grabs Tav by the neck solely at the player's initiative, and the dialogue clearly implies that Tav wants this.

Tav has previously reacted with obvious pleasure to similar actions by Astarion in other scenes.

I genuinely do not understand why Baudelaire Welch's contribution should be considered more significant, given that they joined the project during the later stages of the game's development. Especially when you consider that the character was originally created by another writer, who laid the foundation for his personality, story, and key traits. Prioritizing late additions that distort the original concept seems unfair and disrespectful to Astarion's creator and his vision.

At this point, I would like there to be an option in the game to kiss Astarion's hand. A hand kiss is also a symbolic gesture that conveys respect, devotion, submission, and acknowledgment of power or authority. I find this incredibly romantic, and I truly miss it. It would further emphasize the symbolism of this route.

Lord. King. Master.

So impressed by a tremendous work that Kate Kotova did putting this massive analysis together. Brava!

The community is forever in your debt, Kate!

I got curious about how Astarion looks in moments when the in-game camera doesn’t show him. And when I finally saw it, I froze, unable to stop recording… I nearly melted from tenderness as I looked at his dear, satisfied face. Oh, my Lord…

These excerpts from Van Richten's Guide to Vampires seem particularly intriguing in the context of Astarion’s “good” ending, as I’ve always been skeptical of the very idea of “fixing” a vampire. Even without considering the early concept of Astarion’s backstory, where he was already pursuing eternal life and acting immorally as a corrupt magistrate long before becoming a vampire.

In D&D lore, vampires are inherently evil creatures by default. Their alignment undergoes a drastic shift upon their transformation: emotions and feelings become distorted, moral principles (if they weren’t already corrupt before the transformation) are warped, and the thirst for power and control grows significantly. However, this aspect is often overlooked when it comes to Astarion’s spawn route, while all "vampiric" traits are attributed exclusively to his Ascended version. This, in reality, is a selective application of the lore.

Stephen Rooney: "It's important to have that… and also… he's a vampire, he's all about blood and he's all about darker sides of humanity. So, it's important that that's represented in the game."

Given these facts, the idea of shifting Astarion's alignment to good or even neutral seems highly unlikely. Considering the nature of vampirism, keeping him away from dark desires would be a significant challenge for Tav. It might even require rolling Charisma checks every few years to prevent him from succumbing to temptation. The only real way to move him toward a stable "redemption" would be to cure him of vampirism, which, as far as I know, is possible within D&D. However, the game itself never addresses this possibility. Instead, the spawn-ending merely offers the chance to seek a way to remain in the sun without sacrifices or deals with dark powers, as Ascended Astarion does.

However, according to Neil Newbon, Astarion is in harmony with his vampirism.

"Astarion’s challenge wasn't directly related to him being a vampire. It was that he was a spawn, and that he wasn't free. He is technically free now. [...] He's okay with being a vampire."

The prospect of being cured of vampirism does not even appeal to Astarion.

The first classification includes those who became vampires because of “deadly desire,” like Strahd Von Zarovich (see Chapter XIII, “The Who’s Doomed of Ravenloft,” in the Ravenloft boxed set).

The second comprises those who became vampires as the result of a curse, whether laid by a mortal or by an evil deity.

The third and final category is the most numerous: those unfortunates who became vampires as a result of the attack of another vampire.

The first two categories have one major factor in common: in almost all cases, these vampires were evil while they were alive. The transition to undeath never affects this, except, in some cases, to intensify their evil.

The final category is a completely different case. Victims of vampires have no commonality with regard to ethos, moral strictures, philosophy of life, care toward others, or any other factor. A victim of a vampire could be a saint or a sinner, a paladin or an assassin, a compassionate healer or a ruthless alley-basher.

The fact is that the vast majority of vampires are chaotic and extremely evil. How does this come about? In most cases, it seems that the transition to undeath itself brings about this grim change in the victim’s mentality; the Fledgling’s previous worldview is largely irrelevant.

There are, however, some fascinating exceptions—documented cases of Fledgling vampires that managed to retain some of the attitudes and beliefs they had while alive, at least for a time. What sets these exceptions apart? Was it, as some sages suggest, a characteristic of the vampire that created them? Or was it something inherent within the victim?

My own theory is this: the victim must possess immense strength of will, and the vampire that killed them must be prevented, in some way, from implementing the innate control such creatures have over “secondary” vampires. (This can happen if the creating vampire leaves the area or is destroyed between the time of the victim’s death and the night the victim first rises as a vampire.)

Some of the most fascinating examples of this sort of "carryover" were recorded by a sage whose name has been tragically lost in a treatise whose title I have borrowed (with thanks) for this chapter: The Mind of the Vampire. Two examples follow:

A young, naive man, raised in a sheltered and privileged family, was slain by a vampire passing through the neighborhood. At first, he was unaware of his true nature (or unwilling to accept it), believing that his "death" had been nothing more than a profound illness and that his "premature" burial was merely a mistake by his overzealous family. However, evidence of his vampiric nature soon became apparent. The poor wretch was unable to fully renounce the life he had left behind and took to "haunting" his old home, watching from the shadows and pretending he was still, at least peripherally, part of mortal life. He might have seemed a wholly pathetic figure were it not for his vicious attacks on anyone who dared to take away the semblance of his former life.

An intrepid vampire hunter was slain by one of the creatures she so tenaciously hunted; the monster that killed her was immediately destroyed by her colleagues. For reasons unknown, these colleagues neglected to take the necessary precautions to prevent the woman from rising as a vampire. The trauma she experienced upon realizing her vampiric condition was almost—but not quite—enough to drive her mad. She had taken up her life's work as a moral duty, committed to ridding the world of the scourge of vampirism, and now she had become the very thing she had always hated! Despite the shock, she resolved to make the best of the hand Fate had dealt her. She dedicated her unlife to continuing her mortal mission, using her newfound powers to track down and destroy others of her kind. Tragically, her sense of duty soon became corrupted by a quest for power, and she was ultimately destroyed by Strahd Von Zarovich.

Van Richten's Guide to Vampires. TSR, 1991, Chapter XII: "The Mind of the Vampire: The Psychology of Immortality."

But this thesis raises a fascinating question: if we set aside the matter of feeding habits, could a vampire exhibit other behavior patterns that might be described as “good”? The answer is “theoretically yes,” and I can even cite one short-lived example.

A man of good alignment was killed by a vampire and subsequently became a vampire himself, initially under the control of his dark master. When the master vampire was destroyed, the “minion” vampire became free-willed. Despite his undead condition, he still held the beliefs and attitudes that had, during his life, categorized him as Good. In secret, he resolved to use his powers to at least partially amend the damage caused by both himself and his master. For several decades, he acted as a secret benefactor to his hometown.

Unfortunately, this situation changed over time. At first, the undead benefactor sought no recognition, keeping his identity and nature completely secret. He lived in a cave on the outskirts of town and had no contact with the living. However, after a decade, it seems he began to resent the lack of gratitude shown by the townsfolk for his generosity. He started leaving behind notes requesting some form of “concrete appreciation,” generally in the form of money, in exchange for his efforts. (Of course, he had no need for money; the coins were purely symbolic of the thanks he felt he deserved.) His demands grew increasingly steep until the townsfolk decided his requests were excessive and stopped paying.

At this point, the vampire’s feelings toward the townsfolk turned to hatred. In his rage, he fell upon them like a scourge, terrorizing them until he was eventually destroyed by a group of intrepid adventurers.

I have a theory that explains this transformation. Eternity is a long time, and as the years passed, the vampire’s feelings began to change. Gradually, he lost his sense of kinship with the living and started prioritizing his own desires—even when those desires were irrational—over theirs. Eventually, he came to view their very lives as insignificant and unworthy of his consideration.

I strongly believe that this shift in attitude happens, inevitably, to all vampires. For some, it occurs almost immediately; for others, it may take decades. Although I lack concrete evidence to support this conjecture, I suspect that no vampire can maintain a nature other than Chaotic Evil beyond the Fledgling age category.

Van Richten's Guide to Vampires. TSR, 1991, Chapter XII: "The Mind of the Vampire: A Question of Alignment."

Kneel

Ascended Astarion and how he's not like Cazador